The configure-to-order environment presents significant problems related to the structure of the products being produced, especially for heavily engineered products. There are generally a multitude of base components and options that can be combined to provide a finished product. Frequently there are incompatibilities and dependencies between the components and/or options available to produce the finished product. The task of documenting the structure, costs and prices of these combinations quickly becomes overwhelming. Furthermore, the need to create component combinations which meet marketing, sales, manufacturing and other objectives requires a common method of attribute and component description.
The previous approach to problems associated with heavily engineered products, which are required to fill many different specific needs and environments, is to utilize engineers or others trained in the technical aspects of the products being produced in order to develop the appropriate configuration of specific components for each individual requirement. These configurations can be developed by trained personnel on a case-by-case as-needed basis or the structures can be defined in advance by trained personnel. The terminology used to describe the products for marketing purposes often is not the same terminology used to describe the product for engineering and manufacturing purposes. This lack of common terminology results in errors when the product requirements are communicated from one function to another function.
In cases where configurations are determined on as-needed basis, trained personnel must always be available to develop the appropriate combination of specific components. Significant delays can occur when marketing/sales requirements and communications are not compatible with engineering and manufacturing.
If configurations are developed in advance of need, very significant amounts of time may be required of trained personnel. Additionally, many of the combinations created may never be sold, and they also present a formidable base of information that must be maintained as designs and markets change.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,847,761 discloses a process which can be utilized to either create structures on an as-needed basis or to structure every combination of specific components in advance of need. The method requires the "user" to manually ensure that only acceptable component combinations which meet all requirements are produced. In this world of ever-changing markets, materials, methods and government mandates, a method which requires an individual to personally and manually ensure conformation to all requirements is probably impossible. Furthermore, if all component combinations are to be described by this method in advance, it can present very intimidating storage and maintenance problems in all but the most trivial cases. Any change in the product makeup due to any of the above mentioned factors would require re-entry and re-creation of all affected products.
An improvement over the approach discussed above is to use a decision tree to document in advance-of-need all feasible component combinations. A decision tree depicts levels of decisions which may be made in creating component combinations. The first level would be a choice between one comparable set of components. The second level would be choices of components to add to the product based upon the component chosen at the first level. Additional levels continue until all necessary decisions have been made to describe a complete product. This method allows one to match the requirements of a given product order with the decision points of the decision tree. If a successful path in the tree is found then the appropriate already defined bill-of-material and product description are available. If a successful path is not found then the product is not producible for some reason.
A process based upon decision tree methods quite obviously requires very significant storage capabilities, tremendous effort to define all branches of the tree and exhaustive knowledge and accuracy to limit the decision tree to only producible products. Even in products with limited decision levels and components the decision tree can become very complex. A recent trial of this method resulted in a decision tree with hundreds of thousands of decision points and the method was abandoned as it appeared to be almost impossible to accurately create the particular decision tree and maintain same. Any changes in product design would have resulted in monumental rework of the decision tree. Furthermore, depiction or display of the decision tree for validation purposes was virtually impossible.
The need exists for an automated method to select specific components which will result in a product structure which will meet or exceed the requirements set forth in a purchase order received for a product and provide those components as a bill of material.
The present invention promotes configuration-to-order or as-needed by not requiring that every possible combination of specific components be determined in advance. Component-to-attribute relationships are utilized thereby not requiring that the relationship between all individual components be determined, either on a case-by-case or on an as-needed basis. Less input is required from personnel trained in the technical aspects of the products because technical personnel provide definitions for appropriate use of components, thereby allowing the frequent activity of configuration to be accomplished by non-technical personnel. For example, an automobile manufacturer can define the appropriate use for an engine as being for use in a vehicle of weight less than 2000 pounds rather than defining each specific use for the engine. The size of required information base which must be maintained as compared to currently available methods is reduced. Incompatibilities are defined based universally on attributes rather than on specific item by specific item. The present invention can be applied to product structure, cost and price which are all based on attributes but with different criteria. Unlimited levels of configured components are provided for in addition to a configured end item. Since no actual structures are developed in advance of need, storage and maintenance requirements are reduced dramatically. Since it is very easy to create configurations as required, by using the invention, configurations can be created, used and then discarded rather than being maintained until needed again. This invention easily supports effectivity based bill-of-material and engineering change notice systems. This invention also allows specific components to be easily added as needed, rather than requiring them to be defined in advance.